It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama to Raise Minimum Wage for Federal Contractors - CNN

page: 4
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:42 AM
link   
reply to post by victhebutcher
 


Well, if you flip burgers you really don't have other's lives in your hands. If your not a supervisor you don't have any control or power over anything at all.

You won't be laying awake at night worrying about a meeting or a presentation. You won't be worrying about a memo. You won't be laying there wondering if the electrical wiring you installed will work properly and pass an inspection.

Pretty much all you have to do at some of these jobs is show up and move your body. No thinking required.

Sounds pretty good for me, I'd miss being able to take a vacation or buy some nice things now and then -- but if it cut my stress levels...




posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 11:55 AM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 


Alright, i wouldn't say flipping burgers has no responsibility but it does have very little especially in comparison to most other professions, but someones gotta do it weather you like it or not, and if you think they deserve MUCH less for that than i just simply don't agree. We can't all obtain a job position that you think rises to your standard of responsibility. Your right a surgeon should be paid more than a fry cook. But if someones true passion is to flip burgers they should be allowed to make a decent living on that, and shouldn't be forced to move into another profession for any reason.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by victhebutcher
 



Alright, i wouldn't say flipping burgers has no responsibility but it does have very little especially in comparison to most other professions, but someones gotta do it weather you like it or not, and if you think they deserve MUCH less for that than i just simply don't agree. We can't all obtain a job position that you think rises to your standard of responsibility. Your right a surgeon should be paid more than a fry cook. But if someones true passion is to flip burgers they should be allowed to make a decent living on that, and shouldn't be forced to move into another profession for any reason.


Flipping burgers is a high school job, not a "I need to raise my family" job.

If your passion is flipping burgers, become a franchise owner, or start your own restaruant and staff it with teenagers and college kids. You could even help out in the kitchen for fun.

Or, that person would probably be happy becoming a chef and working for a pricey restaraunt making up their own dishes. There is no excuse for having to stay employed by Burger King.

If every employee of McDonalds starts making $15/hour the price of the food is going to go up. The pay increase will be irrelavant when the ripple takes affect and now $15/hour is the new minimum wage and those same employees want a new livable wage set at $20/hour.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by victhebutcher
 


I have several true passions in life, and none of them pay the bills. Sometimes it happens that way, but you aren't going to hear me complaining about how I don't get paid a decent living for doing the things I have a passion for. That's a sense of entitlement.

You either need to figure out how to make your passion something that pays the bills or you accept that your passion is nothing more than a hobby and work at something else that pays the bills. You don't demand that the rest of us accommodate your desire to have your passion support you.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by victhebutcher
 


Well my point is, what motivation do I have to work in a stressful or demanding job, when I can pretty much show up and turn my brain off and still make enough to live on?

Granted I wouldn't have very many nice things -- but I'd have a roof over my head, and food on the table. I certainly wouldn't have to worry about all the things a brain surgeon would.

If they're going to make more money, I want to also make more money. And, if it's going to actually work, the government would have to freeze all prices and demand companies and corporations take profit cuts. They'd also have to raise everyone under a certain income level's pay; not just the minimum wage.

That will NEVER happen.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:17 PM
link   


I think I might just think about voting republican next election.
reply to post by rickymouse
 


This may be the most intelligent thing I think you have ever stated


Though, I dont trust ANY of them any more. Republican or Democrat. It makes no difference. None of them are there for the people. They are in office for themselves. Period.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:27 PM
link   
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


when minimum wage goes up so does the price of everything else, your right i mean i really cant deny that or argue it, not that i'd want to if it is true. For me its not about the wages anymore, even though i know i should stay on topic. Im going to be honest and say I guess i just don't like your attitude. But while we argue someone HAS to make a living wage off of that job because of the simple fact that it is so difficult for them to find work elsewhere. What do you suggest we do with these people? Make them all get respectable jobs? i Know you are not the one saying that and i am. it sure seems that you and many others on here have a MAJOR issue with the people that work in the fast food industry. I wish the industry didn't exist but it does, and people are going to work there, and weather you or them like it or not, some of those people are inevitably going to end up working there the rest of their life. So tell me, why should they not be able to make a living wage if that is the circumstance? And btw if you've ever applied to a mickey d's or burger king they are all about what they like to call "careers" something you say a job at mcdonalds or burger king should not be.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:32 PM
link   
reply to post by ketsuko
 


Passions and hobby's can't be expected to be a career. I get that. Nor am i complaining. i was referring to IF someones true passion happens to already be an available career...........



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
at this point i think i just look like the type who advocates rights to lazy slackers due to my own misunderstanding and miseducation



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 12:38 PM
link   

victhebutcher
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


when minimum wage goes up so does the price of everything else, your right i mean i really cant deny that or argue it, not that i'd want to if it is true. For me its not about the wages anymore, even though i know i should stay on topic. Im going to be honest and say I guess i just don't like your attitude. But while we argue someone HAS to make a living wage off of that job because of the simple fact that it is so difficult for them to find work elsewhere. What do you suggest we do with these people? Make them all get respectable jobs? i Know you are not the one saying that and i am. it sure seems that you and many others on here have a MAJOR issue with the people that work in the fast food industry. I wish the industry didn't exist but it does, and people are going to work there, and weather you or them like it or not, some of those people are inevitably going to end up working there the rest of their life. So tell me, why should they not be able to make a living wage if that is the circumstance? And btw if you've ever applied to a mickey d's or burger king they are all about what they like to call "careers" something you say a job at mcdonalds or burger king should not be.


It's been explained. If you are any good at it, you won't stay at minimum wage, and you won't stay a floor worker for long. If you choose to make it your career, you'll be moving up through management.

As for people being stuck there now, well, it's the economy. You can't make it better by instituting policies to make it worse.

When it starts to grow again, people won't be stuck in fast food like they are now. They'll have the opportunity to seek something better. Just as soon as government stops trying to make everything better, business can ... er ... get back to business as it were.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by victhebutcher
 


If you really want to help people out--consider this:

Help to abolish all income taxes against the individual, and all taxation against businesses.

Basically, no more interal taxation.

"But what about all that stuff taxation pays for?" Hold on.

If we abolished all internal taxation, both individuals and businesses would have more of their money to spend as they see fit. This would benefit everyone.

The next step would be to raise tariffs on trade to greater amounts to make up for the loss from doing away with internal taxes on income.

This would cause the price of goods produced in other countries to soar, making foreign bought merchandise expensive for people in the US. As a result, the bulk of the goods that we buy would skyrocket in price and less and less people would purchase them. American companies that had moved manufacturing plants overseas would begin losing money, this would give them the incentive to bring back all of our lost manufacturing jobs--on top of the incentive created when all internal taxes are abolished.

State and local governments can generate revenue through sales taxes.
Federal government can generate revenue through high tariffs on trade.
The majority of federal programs are useless, and no one would even need them anymore when citizens keep 100% of the money they earn, and all of the manufactoring jobs that we lost come back.
The United States would once again export something other than "culture." We would stop being a nation of burger flippers.

Foregien countries could begin rebuilding their infrastructure since they would no longer have to internally compete with American businesses.

Politicians talk about "creating jobs," but they don't do anything. It's all talk.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


I would like to fix what I said about the states and local governments apportioning a sales tax.

A state government could easily use this as a form of coercion. So, only city governments should have the authority to levy a sales tax. This would make a county dependent on it's cities, and this would make a state dependent on it's counties.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


You would have to remove a lot of the existing internal regulations first. Otherwise, those companies could not move their manufacturing back fast enough to avoid going out of business thanks to all the red tape you have to go through to get approval for any kind of industry these days.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 01:24 PM
link   

ketsuko
reply to post by LewsTherinThelamon
 


You would have to remove a lot of the existing internal regulations first. Otherwise, those companies could not move their manufacturing back fast enough to avoid going out of business thanks to all the red tape you have to go through to get approval for any kind of industry these days.


I agree completely, of course. The concept that we need government permission to engage in commerce is ludicrous. If I am selling produce, it belongs to me, so I have the right to do with it as I please.



posted on Jan, 28 2014 @ 07:25 PM
link   
Under what he just signed 0 workers working on federal contracts now will get a raise.

THIS IS ONLY FOR NEW CONTRACTS.

And there only less then 1% make minimum wage.

Sounds good on TV but is a fake action for publicity.



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ketsuko
 


reply to post by MystikMushroom
 




victhebutcher
at this point i think i just look like the type who advocates rights to lazy slackers due to my own misunderstanding and miseducation


I am going to come to your defense on some of this Vic, if I can at least - and listen to what I am saying here, ATS - I will try and highlight the important parts.

The truth of the matter is that a lot of sectors of the economy like fast food and Wal Mart employ a certain amount of workers, they need those workers to function as a business. That set amount of workers is not going to change, because Wal Mart and fast food restaurants set the number, and they know this.

Therefore, you are going to have a set number of people in those jobs. Even if someone leaves, someone else will replace them. Is it realistic to think that these jobs are just for high school workers? That depends on what the data say, and I'm sure that the corporations would rather not have job turnover.



See this protest? These are people that are doing their part to have our country function. And it is disrespectful and unappreciative to not let someone who does their part in a first-world country earn enough to make a living. These are not our enemies, these are people that are allowing us to live in a functioning country.

I don't see a compelling reason to hurt other citizens of the U.S. based on principle. The data from economists (including 75 renown economists and 7 noble laureates) show that there is just no argument to win based on facts and data.


Past increases in hourly pay have had “little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market,” the economists wrote. “A minimum wage increase could have a small stimulative effect on the economy as low-wage workers spend their additional earnings.”


Source: Seven Noble Laureattes Support Minimum Wage Increase

The only argument we are winning here by promoting harming someone's living wage is the argument that ignorance is an excuse to hurt people in order to promote an agenda of hurting people because it is based on principle and not reason.

But really - is it committing to principle? Or are our political decisions being manipulated by corporate funding with the intent on confusing our thoughts through misleading and explicitly incorrect data?

What I am seeing here is that people are more interested in promoting a system they understand that is less beneficial to the citizens of their country and themselves than promoting a system that is more complex but more beneficial - I would be willing to bet that someone would be willing to hurt themselves and others in order to maintain principle -

Now, the problem with that is, who is creating that principle?

So that becomes a problem the less and less educated our society becomes. There are a few things that come into play here. Number one are news organizations like Fox News and the Koch Brothers (and others across a lot of different spectrum, honestly) that intentionally distribute false information that makes it harder to get scientifically accurate data. Number two - Citizens United.

Ketsuko - you and I don't know how much our opinions that lower wage workers should be paid less are actually a result of money being dumped into politicians from corporations purposely trying to mislead you (and I) about the facts so that they can get away with paying people less than they are worth through lying (on purpose) about the facts.

As the data from leading economists explicitly show that raising the minimum wage will neither harm the economy or cost jobs, there is clearly a faction that is purposefully misleading people - and making it harder for me to have an informed opinion about the situation as well -

That means they are actually manipulating you and I and everyone here in this discussion with false data in order to get us to come to a conclusion that benefits corporations and corporate leaders by keeping them from being held accountable to paying their workers living wages.

I don't know what the reason for your opinion is, Ketsuko, or others on ATS and in this nation - but the bias in it is likely stemming directly from people who wish to harm their employees in order to raise their paycheck, and more than likely in an explicit and thought-out manner.

This all brings me to another point - I would not mind changing the system a bit in order to help educate people like myself and Vic to help us find work that is of a more career-oriented nature.

But why isn't a system like this being promoted? More than likely because the corporations don't want to lose their employees to better jobs, but at the same time, they don't want to pay them living wages - therefore, the best solution for them is to maintain the broken system while not being held accountable.


Somewhere, someone is looking at this discussion and laughing because they were able to manipulate people so thoroughly and effectively. So what ATS has to understand as well is this - whoever is behind this disinformation is not interested in helping the people of this country find better work. What their interest is in is maintaining low wages and maintaining the work force that we have.

At this point, I am assuming that Obama is going to end up looking like an idiot, and the minimum wage is not going to increase - but I'm also assuming that is going to put us in a worse situation as a nation, because I don't think that maintaining minimum wage is going to be followed up with any kind of positive programs to help those people find better jobs.

And as more and more people in America start to earn minimum wage jobs, we could end up similar to China with a work force that is paid highly unethically. I think the fundamental misunderstanding here is that

1) It is possible to make it, as a college-educated person, to the middle-class.
2) That corporations want a middle-class.

These fundamental misunderstandings, combined with delusions about what's going to happen if the minimum wage is maintained, are spelling the future of our country not as one where there is a thriving middle-class, but one where there is a "thriving" slave class. I would have a different opinion if the data showed differently, but it doesn't.

If we had economists saying "Hey, raising the minimum wage is going to cost jobs and hurt the economy" then I might have to weigh hurting the economy against the ethics of paying lower wage workers a living wage or not. But this is not the discussion we are having. We having an entirely different discussion.

Still, to close things out with an opposing opinion, I think there is some merit though to this idea of whether we should be a nation of "common sense" (which is often uneducated) or of educated people making educated decisions. What I kind of see happening is some sort of nationalist vibe rising.
edit on 29amWed, 29 Jan 2014 06:41:15 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 07:13 AM
link   

Stormdancer777
Wrabbit and darkbake,

I don't see this ending well.

We have to have livable wages for blue collar workers, those jobs in my opinion are what built this country.

They want us dirt poor and dependent.


I know, I agree with you Stormdancer. Thanks for being so clear. I don't think people understand the gravity of the situation we are in. I think the biggest mistake being made here is people over 30 thinking that people under 30 have the same easy time getting work that they had.

The truth is, there are so many college-educated (yes, that means people that have an education and put work into it) people under 30 having to work at fast food jobs and the like that the older people trying to apply outdated social norms on them is going to be dangerous and possibly even unstable for our nation politically.
edit on 29amWed, 29 Jan 2014 07:18:55 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 07:22 AM
link   

LewsTherinThelamon
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 



We have to have livable wages for blue collar workers, those jobs in my opinion are what built this country.


There is a difference between a blue collar worker and an employee at McDonalds.

Many blue collar workers have a skill in some trade, like carpentry, masonry, auto-mechanics, plumbing, electric...ect. Because they are skilled laborers, they tend to not make minimum wage. Minimum wage is set for unskilled workers--burger flippers, or any job that can be done where the only requirement for employment states that the employee must have a pulse.

If you are over the age of 25 and trying to support a family by working at McDonalds as anything other than a franchise owner, you have done something wrong. Instead of messing with the economy by demanding to move minimum wage up higher (which won't matter when the prices on everything else also increase), it would be better to get a skill in a trade and make yourself more useful.

Your output (how much you help the company earn) will be in equilibrium with your input(wage or salary).


A lot of people are doing something wrong, then - and also, let's not forget that those trade jobs were outsourced overseas and replaced by a lot of jobs in the service industry, specifically fast food and retail.

These jobs exist, and people are expecting them to pay living wages, because that is the way the system is set up right now. If there is no alternative, then people are going to be working at the jobs that are available. End of story. If there was an alternative, we would not be seeing so many people working in fast food and retail.

The average American worker is not the one who decides the policy that dictates what jobs are available for them to take. That accountability falls squarely on the shoulders of corporations and Republicans.

The average American worker takes the jobs available to them, and that has been fast food and retail because corporations have been outsourcing the factory and labor jobs overseas. To say that an average American worker has influence in this is ridiculous and patently false.

Now, the corporations have to be held accountable and pay the piper for what they have done, let's make no mistake about this. If we go against the minimum wage increase Obama is offering we are talking about taking a stance that lowers the standard of living in this nation.

And once we take that stance, that means that everyone on this forum is going to take a hit to their standard of living. Because the poor and growing working class will not be able to make living wages. Regardless of how much people wish to manifest other jobs for them that don't exist, it won't happen.

What will happen is their standards of living will decrease, reducing consumerism, reducing the economy to worse than it already is, reducing the standard of living of the middle-class as well. The cuts have already been made to superfluous purchases, now the cuts are going to be made to things that will legitimately hurt standard of living and reduce it.

We are not talking about a situation where raising the minimum wage is going to hurt the economy. The economists are clear that it will help the economy. Check out the links and quotes I offer in this thread. We are talking about a situation where ideology is about to get in the way of progress.
edit on 29amWed, 29 Jan 2014 07:32:19 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 07:53 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Stormdancer777
 



So what on earth are people going to do?


People at the level to be impacted by all the min. wage hikes, as if that solves something in isolation...will simply be equally broke with larger numbers to 'feel' better about while being there.

Its amazing to see the 'magic wand' mentality at work here. As if ..just..one...more stroke of the wand to enact one more big social change and the clouds will part for sunshine to spread over the land again.


I wanted to say we are talking about a wage increase here, Wrabbit - that seems like a helpful way to empower people.

Even the economists are saying that it will help people get off of government services like food stamps. The wages are so out of balance at the moment that raising them to $10.00 will actually help the economy.

As someone who promotes independence and personal empowerment, I am 100% behind a wage increase.

And another thing to understand, if economists are going for the minimum wage increase, that is important. The Economist is a free market magazine, probably one of the most highly respected magazines in the world. In fact, it is usually against social programs and for economics.

I wouldn't usually be pushing facts so hard in an issue - this just affects me and those around me so much - it is making it too stressful for me to have the time to venture into theoretical discussions, I guess.
edit on 29amWed, 29 Jan 2014 08:19:53 -0600kbamkAmerica/Chicago by darkbake because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 29 2014 @ 08:08 AM
link   

Wrabbit2000

matafuchs
So, if the president does not like the checks and balances he simply acts as if the rules do not apply to him. This is WHY there are checks and balances. I am tired of people blaming 'Boner' or the Tea Party. That is basically what you are agreeing too...



That sums it up pretty well. Separation of Powers is something this President has absolutely no respect for. Hopefully, he steps too far for even a corrupt Congress to tolerate. After all, the power the King is assuming is their power. They may realize they'll never likely get back what they give up here. At least I hope that occurs to them before they'r reduced to a rubber stamping side show to a new Monarch for effective rule and control methods.

*BTW.. How many Tea Party people are there out of the 500+ Congressmen, anyway? It was a handful the last I knew. Still being blamed for so much... (sigh) It'd be silly and laughable if it weren't really happening.
edit on 28-1-2014 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)


Okay this is perfect to reply to thanks Beezer - I actually fully expect Obama's pushing for Executive Action on the minimum wage issue to lead to impeachment trials, we haven't actually talked much about this, but that was originally one of the main reasons I posted this thread.

Minimum wage is a hot enough issue that if Obama uses Executive Power to bypass congress, people are going to notice, I honestly can't believe he decided to go this route - because the exact tactic here of blatantly saying he is going to bypass congress to deal with a hot issue like this - seems so strange to me.

It has some elements of distress in it, like he doesn't think he is going to make it to the end of his term anyway, or else he wouldn't have made this much of a gambit.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join